Environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method and system based on Pareto frontier

Abstract

The invention provides an environment-economy multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method and system based on Pareto frontier, and relates to the field of agricultural technology decision-making. The method comprises the following steps: determining an alternative technology set and constraint conditions suitable for a target crop; the application cost, the income benefit and the environmental benefit of the collection technology are increased; environmental benefits are converted into monetization indexes through a treatment cost method, net economic cost is calculated, and dimensions are unified; screening a non-dominated solution set under double targets of environmental benefit maximization and economic cost minimization by utilizing Pareto frontier analysis; and finally, according to user preferences (environment priority, economy priority or comprehensive optimum) and a cost threshold value, an optimal technology or a technology combination is decided from the Pareto frontier. According to the method, the problems of subjective weight, information loss and hard constraint processing difficulty of a traditional weighting method are solved, and scientific tradeoff and optimal configuration of agricultural technology application in environmental and economic benefits are realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of agricultural informatization and decision support technology, and in particular relates to a decision-making method and system for agricultural technology application based on Pareto frontier environmental-economic multi-objective optimization. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of green agriculture, a large number of new technologies have emerged in agricultural production (such as fully biodegradable mulch films, integrated water and fertilizer management, and new soil conditioners). Farmers or agricultural managers face the dilemma of balancing economic and environmental benefits when choosing technologies.

[0003] Existing methods for agricultural technology assessment and selection mostly employ single-objective optimization or multi-objective weighted synthesis. The weighted method, in particular, requires manually assigning weights to each indicator (e.g., 60% for economic benefits and 40% for environmental benefits), and then calculating a comprehensive score for ranking. However, this traditional method has significant drawbacks: 1. High subjectivity of weights: The setting of weights relies heavily on expert experience, lacks objective standards, and fails to reflect the non-linear trade-offs between benefits. Different decision-makers may set completely different weights, leading to unstable results.

[0004] 2. Severe information loss: Weighted summation compresses multi-dimensional objectives (economic, environmental) into a single one-dimensional score, making it impossible for decision-makers to see those "suboptimal" options that excel in specific aspects (such as the environment).

[0005] 3. Inconvenient Constraint Handling: Agricultural production is subject to strong biological constraints, such as "a certain crop can only use certain technologies" or "a certain type of technology is prohibited in a certain region." Traditional weighted methods struggle to efficiently integrate such rigid selection conditions into optimization models, often leading to recommendations that deviate from actual application needs.

[0006] Therefore, there is an urgent need for a multi-objective optimization method that can simultaneously handle hard constraints, objectively reflect the conflict between economic and environmental goals, and provide visual decision support. Summary of the Invention

[0007] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method and system for decision-making on agricultural technology application based on Pareto fronts and environmental-economic multi-objective optimization. This method establishes a multi-objective optimization model and uses Pareto front analysis to identify the optimal set of technologies under crop adaptability constraints, so as to achieve a balance between maximizing environmental benefits and minimizing economic costs.

[0008] The first aspect of this invention discloses a multi-objective optimization method for agricultural technology application based on the Pareto front; the method includes: Step S1: Construct a database of alternative technologies and constraints; determine the set of alternative technologies based on the varietal characteristics and technological adaptability of the target crop, and set hard constraints. Step S2: Collect attribute indicators for each technology in the candidate technology set. The attribute indicators include at least the cost of new application, revenue increase and environmental benefits. Step S3: Monetize the attribute indicators; convert the environmental benefits into monetized environmental benefits NC based on market value or governance costs, and calculate the new technology economic cost TC based on the new application costs and revenue benefits; Step S4: Construct a two-dimensional coordinate system based on the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and the new technology economic costs (TC), perform Pareto front analysis on the candidate technology set, and select the non-dominated solution set as the Pareto optimal set. Step S5: Based on the decision preference pattern and the preset economic cost threshold, select or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set, for example, technology A has a cost of 100, technology B has a cost of 200, and combination AB has a cost of 300.

[0009] Preferably, in step S1, determining the set of candidate technologies specifically includes: Identify the growth cycle and agronomic requirements of the target crop; All available technologies suitable for the target crop are selected from the agricultural technology database to form an initial candidate set T. Allowed ; The hard constraints include maximum cost limits for individual technologies or a list of prohibited or restricted technologies for specific environmental areas.

[0010] Preferably, in step S3, the specific process of the monetization calculation is as follows: For the environmental benefits mentioned above, the cost required to completely treat the pollutants reduced by the technology is calculated using the substitution cost method or the treatment cost method, or the market value corresponding to the resource savings brought about by the technology is calculated to obtain the monetized environmental benefits NC. The economic cost TC of the aforementioned new technology is calculated using the following formula: TC=C add I inc Or TC=f(C add ,I inc ); Among them, C add The additional application cost compared to the old technology includes procurement costs and operating expenses; I inc The increased revenue compared to the old technology includes increased output revenue and quality premium revenue; the economic cost TC of the new technology is an indicator that needs to be minimized in the optimization objective.

[0011] Preferably, the specific process of step S4 includes: Step S41: Construct a benefit-cost scatter plot with the monetization environmental benefits NC on the horizontal axis and the new technology economic costs TC on the vertical axis; Step S42: Perform a dominance judgment on any two technical solutions A and B in the set of alternative technologies; if the cost of solution A is not higher than that of solution B and its environmental benefits are not lower than those of solution B, and at least one indicator is strictly better than that of solution B, then solution A is determined to dominate solution B. Step S43: Traverse all technical solutions, eliminate dominated and disadvantageous solutions, and retain all non-dominated solutions to form the Pareto optimal set P. Frontier .

[0012] Preferably, in step S5, the decision preference mode includes an environmental benefit maximization mode, an economic cost minimization mode, and an overall efficiency optimization mode. The environmental benefit maximization mode is: within the economic cost threshold range, select the technology with the largest Pareto optimal centralized monetization environmental benefit NC; The economic cost minimization mode: selects the technology with the lowest Pareto optimal concentration of new technologies, which has the lowest economic cost (TC). The optimal overall performance mode: Define the ideal point I = (NC max ,TC min ), the maximum and minimum values ​​in the current Pareto optimal set.

[0013] Calculate the Euclidean distance between each point in the Pareto optimal set and the ideal point, and select the point with the smallest distance as the optimal recommended solution.

[0014] Preferably, step S5 further includes a multi-technology combination decision-making step: Step S51: In the Pareto optimal set, select a subset P' of technologies that meet the preset economic cost threshold and environmental benefit threshold; Step S52: Perform a combined traversal of the technologies within the technology subset P'; Step S53: Calculate the total economic cost and total environmental benefits of each combination scheme, and eliminate combinations whose total economic cost exceeds the threshold; Step S54: Among the remaining available combinations, output the optimal combination scheme according to the decision preference pattern.

[0015] Preferably, in the multi-technology combination decision-making step, the combination traversal includes: Selecting a single technology: Directly select a single technology from the technology subset P'; Select multiple technologies: Calculate all combinations of C(P′,k), where k is the number of technologies in the combination, k≥2, and sum the costs and benefits of the combinations.

[0016] The second aspect of this invention discloses a Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization decision-making system for agricultural technology applications; the system includes: The data management module is used to store agricultural technology data, crop adaptability information, and attribute index data; The indicator calculation module is used to calculate the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and new technology economic costs (TC) of each candidate technology based on the collected attribute indicators. The Pareto analysis module is used to make a dominance judgment based on the aforementioned monetization environmental benefits and the economic costs of new technologies, and to generate a Pareto optimal set. The decision optimization module is used to receive user-defined constraints and preference patterns, and to filter or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set. The human-computer interaction module is used to display benefit-cost scatter plots, Pareto frontier curves, and the final recommended solution.

[0017] A third aspect of this invention discloses an electronic device. The electronic device includes a memory and a processor. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method according to any one of the first aspects of this disclosure.

[0018] A fourth aspect of this invention discloses a computer-readable storage medium. The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method based on Pareto fronts, as described in any of the first aspects of this disclosure.

[0019] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects: 1. Multi-objective integration under composite constraints: This invention is the first to integrate crop adaptability (hard constraint) with economic and environmental (soft objectives) into the Pareto analysis framework, ensuring that the recommended solution is not only theoretically optimal, but also in line with the actual agricultural production.

[0020] 2. The "two-step" method for unifying environmental benefits: This method solves the problem of inconsistent dimensions of the heterogeneous environmental benefits (such as water conservation, carbon sequestration, and plastic reduction) generated by different technologies. By monetizing these benefits through methods such as governance cost method, the dimensions are unified, and horizontal comparability of environmental benefits among different technologies is achieved.

[0021] 3. Objective decision-making and visualization: Pareto front analysis replaces subjective weight setting, retains all non-dominated advantageous solutions, avoids information loss, and intuitively displays the cost-benefit trade-off relationship through visual charts.

[0022] 4. Flexible decision-making modes: It provides multiple modes such as environmental priority, economic priority and comprehensive optimality, and locks the optimal solution set by preset ecological or economic thresholds, which changes the traditional decision-making mode that is only economically driven and realizes the optimization goal of environmental priority. Attached Figure Description

[0023] To more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the specific embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained from these drawings without creative effort.

[0024] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a Pareto frontier-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization decision-making method for agricultural technology application according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the benefit-cost scatter plot and frontier curve based on Pareto front analysis in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0025] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the overall process of the method of the present invention.

[0026] Figure 4 This is a structural diagram of an environmental-economic multi-objective optimization decision-making system for agricultural technology application based on the Pareto front, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 5 This is a structural diagram of an electronic device according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0027] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0028] The first aspect of this invention discloses a decision-making method for agricultural technology application based on Pareto frontier-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization.

[0029] Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization decision-making method for agricultural technology application according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown below. Figure 1 and Figure 3 As shown, the method includes: Step S1: Construct a database of alternative technologies and constraints; determine the set of alternative technologies based on the varietal characteristics and technological adaptability of the target crop, and set hard constraints. In step S1, determining the set of alternative technologies specifically includes: Identify the growth cycle and agronomic requirements of the target crop; All available technologies suitable for the target crop are selected from the agricultural technology database to form an initial candidate set T. Allowed ; The hard constraints include maximum cost limits for individual technologies or a list of prohibited or restricted technologies for specific environmental areas.

[0030] In some specific embodiments, the set of alternative technologies and constraints are determined as follows: Determine the set of alternative technologies: Based on the specific crop and target crop variety, and considering technological adaptability, determine the set of alternative technologies. For example, the target crop... Only a specific set of technologies can be applied: high-strength thickened mulch film (technology 1), fully biodegradable mulch film (technology 2), soil conditioner (technology 3), and straw return equipment (technology 4). }

[0031] Constraint settings: Set the target crop The cost of applying new technologies is limited, for example, not exceeding C, such as C = 400 yuan / mu.

[0032] Based on the above, we can set an optimization objective function: to maximize the environmental benefits while keeping the additional economic costs below C.

[0033] Step S2: Collect attribute indicators for each technology in the candidate technology set. The attribute indicators include at least the cost of new application, revenue increase and environmental benefits. In some specific embodiments, the technical attribute indicators are confirmed as follows: against For each technology, the following core attribute indicators are collected: specifically, the additional economic cost corresponding to the specific technology, the increased revenue brought by the new technology, and the environmental (ecological) benefits of the new technology. For example, the attribute indicators of the "fully biodegradable mulch film" technology are shown in Table 1: Table 1

[0034] Similarly, collect relevant attribute data for other alternative technologies.

[0035] Step S3: Monetize the attribute indicators; convert the environmental benefits into monetized environmental benefits NC based on market value or governance costs, and calculate the new technology economic cost TC based on the new application costs and revenue benefits; In step S3, the specific process of monetization calculation is as follows: For the environmental benefits mentioned above, the cost required to completely treat the pollutants reduced by the technology is calculated using the substitution cost method or the treatment cost method, or the market value corresponding to the resource savings brought about by the technology is calculated to obtain the monetized environmental benefits NC. The economic cost TC of the aforementioned new technology is calculated using the following formula: TC=C add I inc Or TC=f(C add ,I inc ); Among them, C add The additional application cost compared to the old technology includes procurement costs and operating expenses; I inc The increased revenue compared to the old technology includes increased output revenue and quality premium revenue; the economic cost TC of the new technology is an indicator that needs to be minimized in the optimization objective.

[0036] In some specific embodiments, the monetization calculation of new technology attribute indicators is as follows: Using the attribute values ​​of each new technology collected in step S2, the monetization calculation of all indicators is completed for the next step of monetary standardization benefit assessment. The goal of this stage is to obtain the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and the new technology economic costs (TC) respectively.

[0037] The calculation method for monetized environmental benefits (NC) is the cost of remediation required for the reduced pollution (or other forms of green technology such as water savings, carbon emissions trading, etc.). For example, for the aforementioned "fully biodegradable mulch film," compared to older technologies, the reduction in mulch film residue is... N Then the environmental benefit value of this item is the value of complete remediation. N The cost of residual plastic film NC .

[0038] The economic cost TC of the aforementioned new technology is calculated using the following formula: TC=C add I inc Or TC=f(C add ,I inc ) The above-mentioned method of monetizing technical indicators is applied to all candidate technologies. , to obtain the NC and TC of each technology.

[0039] Step S4: Construct a two-dimensional coordinate system based on the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and the new technology economic costs (TC), perform Pareto front analysis on the candidate technology set, and select the non-dominated solution set as the Pareto optimal set. The specific process of step S4 includes: Step S41: Construct a benefit-cost scatter plot with the monetization environmental benefits NC on the horizontal axis and the new technology economic costs TC on the vertical axis; Step S42: Perform a dominance judgment on any two technical solutions A and B in the set of alternative technologies; if the cost of solution A is not higher than that of solution B and its environmental benefits are not lower than those of solution B, and at least one indicator is strictly better than that of solution B, then solution A is determined to dominate solution B. Step S43: Traverse all technical solutions, eliminate dominated and disadvantageous solutions, and retain all non-dominated solutions to form the Pareto optimal set P. Frontier .

[0040] In some specific embodiments, Pareto front analysis is performed as follows: The new economic cost TC and the monetization environmental benefit NC of each technology, calculated in step S3, are used as two-dimensional indicators to screen feasible solutions using Pareto frontier analysis.

[0041] 1) Draw an NC-TC benefit-cost diagram for all alternative technologies. The feasible set The data in the image is plotted as a scatter plot, such as... Figure 2 As shown: X-axis (horizontal axis): Monetization environmental benefits NC (direction: →maximize, the further to the right the better).

[0042] Y-axis (weaving axis): New technology economic cost TC (direction: ↓ minimize, the lower the better). 2) Dominance Logic: In a two-dimensional coordinate system, pairwise comparisons are performed on the dataset. For the scheme and plan The decision logic is as follows: Condition 1: (Option A is cheaper than Option B, or the costs are the same). Condition 2: (Option A has higher environmental benefits than Option B, or the benefits are the same). Condition 3: (At least one indicator) Strictly superior to B); If all three conditions above are met, then it is determined that: Option A dominates Option B.

[0043] Logical explanation: The fact that option B is dominated implies that there exists an option A that, while costing less (or the same) money, provides greater (or the same) environmental benefits. Therefore, option B is a disadvantageous solution and should be eliminated.

[0044] 3) Extraction of Pareto optimal set Iterate through all solutions, eliminate all dominated solutions, and retain non-dominated solutions.

[0045] Here, Prrontier stands for Pareto Frontier, specifically meaning: the set of all non-dominated solutions, also known as the Pareto optimal set. It represents the set of non-dominated solutions; in agricultural environmental-economic multi-objective optimization, it represents: the set of optimal trade-offs where environmental indicators (such as carbon emissions and nitrogen leaching) and economic indicators (such as revenue and cost) can no longer be simultaneously improved.

[0046] S Scores This represents the set of candidate solutions (schemes), specifically the set of all feasible solutions. Each solution has been evaluated using a multi-objective function. In this application, each T... i This corresponds to one of the following: agricultural management plans or input structures (fertilizer application, irrigation levels, feed additive formulations, etc.). Scores represent pre-calculated multi-objective evaluation results, such as vectors of indicators including economic benefits, environmental costs, and resource efficiency.

[0047] T i Representing the i-th candidate solution, a multi-objective vector, for example:

[0048] In the model of this application: T i It is a specific decision outcome, corresponding to a set of environmental and economic indicator values.

[0049] T j Indicates another scheme used for comparison, compared with T. i Any other scheme for comparing Pareto dominance relations.

[0050] Note: T i With T j All come from the same set S Scores ,j≠i.

[0051] symbol This indicates Pareto dominance. Indicates: Scheme T j Domination Scheme T iIts strict definition is: On all objectives: ; And in at least one objective: ; Taking "smaller is better" as an example, if it were "larger is better", the inequality sign would be reversed.

[0052] symbol This indicates that the solution does not exist; specifically, it means "there is no such solution," and in the formula, it signifies that no solution T exists. j It can control the current plan T i .

[0053] vertical line Indicates conditional constraints (such as that), It is read as: "The set of all elements that satisfy the following conditions".

[0054] Connecting these points forms the Pareto front curve located in the lower right corner of the chart. Each point on this curve represents the highest environmental benefit achievable at a given economic cost, or the lowest economic cost required for a given environmental benefit.

[0055] 4) The final decision-making system, based on the user's preference patterns, starts from... Output the final result :() Model 1: Environmental Benefit Maximization Model Algorithm: In Find the largest NC value in ( The point on the far right of the axis.

[0056] Application: Suitable for ecologically sensitive areas (such as water source protection areas) or scenarios with strict environmental protection assessments. In these cases, maximizing environmental benefits is paramount, even at the cost of increased investment (as long as it remains within budget). – Possible Result: Recommended (Fully biodegradable mulch film), although it has a higher cost (high TC), has the highest environmental benefits (NC).

[0057] Mode 2: Minimum Economic Cost Mode Algorithm: In Find the point with the smallest TC value (the bottom of the Y-axis).

[0058] Application: Suitable for ordinary farmers or those with limited funds. The primary goal is to save money, and environmental protection is secondary.

[0059] Possible outcome: Recommendation (Thickened membrane + recycling) requires minimal investment and remains at the Pareto front (with optimal benefits at the same cost).

[0060] Mode 3: Optimal Overall Efficiency Mode Algorithm: Define ideal point (That is, the perfect point where theoretical benefits are infinite and costs are zero). Calculate the Euclidean distance from each point on the leading edge curve to this ideal point, and select the point closest to it (i.e., the elbow point). To maximize environmental benefits Minimum economic cost Formula: Distance

[0061] For technology i Environmental benefits The economic cost value of technology i Application: It balances economy and environmental protection, offering the best cost performance.

[0062] Step S5: Based on the decision preference pattern and the preset economic cost threshold, select or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set.

[0063] In step S5, the decision preference mode includes the environmental benefit maximization mode, the economic cost minimization mode, and the comprehensive efficiency optimization mode. The environmental benefit maximization mode is: within the economic cost threshold range, select the technology with the largest Pareto optimal centralized monetization environmental benefit NC; The economic cost minimization mode: selects the technology with the lowest Pareto optimal concentration of new technologies, which has the lowest economic cost (TC). The optimal overall performance mode: Define the ideal point I = (NC max ,TC min ), Calculate the Euclidean distance between each point in the Pareto optimal set and the ideal point, and select the point with the smallest distance as the optimal recommended solution.

[0064] Specifically, step S5 further includes a multi-technology combination decision-making step: Step S51: In the Pareto optimal set, select a subset P' of technologies that meet the preset economic cost threshold and environmental benefit threshold; Step S52: Perform a combined traversal of the technologies within the technology subset P'; Step S53: Calculate the total economic cost and total environmental benefits of each combination scheme, and eliminate combinations whose total economic cost exceeds the threshold; Step S54: Among the remaining available combinations, output the optimal combination scheme according to the decision preference pattern.

[0065] Specifically, in the multi-technology combination decision-making step, the combination traversal includes: Selecting a single technology: Directly select a single technology from the technology subset P'; Select multiple technologies: Calculate all combinations of C(P′,k), where k is the number of technologies in the combination, k≥2, and sum the costs and benefits of the combinations.

[0066] For example, technology A costs 100, technology B costs 200, and the combination of A and B costs 300.

[0067] In some specific embodiments, the decision-making and application are as follows: 1) Based on actual environmental governance needs (e.g., cost of application not exceeding 400 yuan / mu, at the Pareto frontier) Find the subset of technologies that satisfy the environmental benefit value. .

[0068] 2) In the technology subset Internally, a technology portfolio is constructed, and the combination of alternative solutions is determined based on the number of potential technologies adopted. For example: A. Select a technology: determine the technology with the closest economic cost but not exceeding 400 yuan / mu, while also maximizing the environmental benefits of monetization.

[0069] B. Select two technologies: through combination We obtain all possible combinations of two technologies, calculate the economic cost of each combination, exclude combinations with an economic cost greater than 400 yuan / mu, and select usable combinations.

[0070] C. Use a combination of three or more technologies: The calculation principle is the same as B.

[0071] In summary, the solution proposed in this invention can: 1. Multi-objective integration under complex constraints: For the first time, crop adaptability (hard constraint) is integrated with economic and environmental (soft objectives) into the Pareto analysis framework.

[0072] 2. "Two-step" environmental benefit unification: This solves the problem of inconsistent dimensions of the heterogeneous environmental benefits (water saving, carbon sequestration, etc.) produced by different technologies. By unifying the dimensions through monetization, it enables horizontal comparison of individual technologies. 3. Environmental benefits as a prerequisite: By pre-setting ecological thresholds to lock in the optimal solution set, the traditional decision-making model, which is dominated by economic factors, is changed, and the optimization goal of prioritizing the environment is achieved.

[0073] The second aspect of this invention discloses a decision-making system for the application of agricultural technologies based on Pareto frontier-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization. Figure 4This is a structural diagram of a Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization decision-making system for agricultural technology application according to an embodiment of the present invention; as shown below. Figure 4 As shown, the system 100 includes: Data management module 101 is used to store agricultural technology data, crop adaptability information, and attribute index data; The indicator calculation module 102 is used to calculate the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and new technology economic costs (TC) of each candidate technology based on the collected attribute indicators. Pareto analysis module 103 is used to make a dominance judgment based on the monetization environmental benefits and the economic costs of new technologies, and generate a Pareto optimal set. The decision optimization module 104 is used to receive user-defined constraints and preference patterns, and to filter or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set. The human-computer interaction module 105 is used to display the benefit-cost scatter plot, the Pareto frontier curve, and the final recommended solution.

[0074] A third aspect of this invention discloses an electronic device. The electronic device includes a memory and a processor. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method according to any one of the first aspects of this invention.

[0075] Figure 5 This is a structural diagram of an electronic device according to an embodiment of the present invention, such as... Figure 5 As shown, the electronic device includes a processor, memory, communication interface, display screen, and input device connected via a system bus. The processor provides computing and control capabilities. The memory includes non-volatile storage media and internal memory. The non-volatile storage media stores the operating system and computer programs. The internal memory provides an environment for the operation of the operating system and computer programs stored in the non-volatile storage media. The communication interface is used for wired or wireless communication with external terminals; wireless communication can be achieved through Wi-Fi, carrier networks, Near Field Communication (NFC), or other technologies. The display screen can be an LCD screen or an e-ink screen. The input device can be a touch layer covering the display screen, buttons, a trackball, or a touchpad mounted on the device's casing, or an external keyboard, touchpad, or mouse.

[0076] Those skilled in the art will understand that Figure 5The structure shown is merely a structural diagram of the part related to the technical solution of this disclosure and does not constitute a limitation on the electronic device to which the solution of this application is applied. The specific electronic device may include more or fewer components than shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0077] A fourth aspect of this invention discloses a computer-readable storage medium. The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of a Pareto front-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method according to any one of the first aspects of this invention.

[0078] Please note that the technical features of the above embodiments can be combined arbitrarily. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments have been described. However, as long as the combination of these technical features does not contradict each other, it should be considered within the scope of this specification. The above embodiments only illustrate several implementation methods of this application, and their descriptions are relatively specific and detailed, but they should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention patent. It should be pointed out that for those skilled in the art, several modifications and improvements can be made without departing from the concept of this application, and these all fall within the protection scope of this application. Therefore, the protection scope of this patent application should be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A decision-making method for agricultural technology application based on Pareto frontier-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step S1: Construct a database of alternative technologies and constraints; determine the set of alternative technologies based on the varietal characteristics and technological adaptability of the target crop, and set hard constraints. Step S2: Collect attribute indicators for each technology in the candidate technology set. The attribute indicators include at least the cost of new application, revenue increase and environmental benefits. Step S3: Monetize the attribute indicators; convert the environmental benefits into monetized environmental benefits NC based on market value or governance costs, and calculate the new technology economic cost TC based on the new application costs and revenue benefits; Step S4: Construct a two-dimensional coordinate system based on the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and the new technology economic costs (TC), perform Pareto front analysis on the candidate technology set, and select the non-dominated solution set as the Pareto optimal set. Step S5: Based on the decision preference pattern and the preset economic cost threshold, select or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S1, determining the set of alternative technologies specifically includes: Identify the growth cycle and agronomic requirements of the target crop; All available technologies suitable for the target crop are selected from the agricultural technology database to form an initial candidate set T. Allowed ; The hard constraints include maximum cost limits for individual technologies or a list of prohibited or restricted technologies for specific environmental areas.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S3, the specific process of monetization calculation is as follows: For the environmental benefits mentioned above, the cost required to completely treat the pollutants reduced by the technology is calculated using the substitution cost method or the treatment cost method, or the market value corresponding to the resource savings brought about by the technology is calculated to obtain the monetized environmental benefits NC. The economic cost TC of the aforementioned new technology is calculated using the following formula: TC=C add I inc ; Among them, C add The additional application cost compared to the old technology includes procurement costs and operating expenses; I inc The increased revenue compared to the old technology includes increased output revenue and quality premium revenue; the economic cost TC of the new technology is an indicator that needs to be minimized in the optimization objective.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The specific process of step S4 includes: Step S41: Construct a benefit-cost scatter plot with the monetization environmental benefits NC on the horizontal axis and the new technology economic costs TC on the vertical axis; Step S42: Perform a dominance judgment on any two technical solutions A and B in the set of alternative technologies; if the cost of solution A is not higher than that of solution B and its environmental benefits are not lower than those of solution B, and at least one indicator is strictly better than that of solution B, then solution A is determined to dominate solution B. Step S43: Traverse all technical solutions, eliminate dominated and disadvantageous solutions, and retain all non-dominated solutions to form the Pareto optimal set P. Frontier .

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In step S5, the decision preference mode includes the environmental benefit maximization mode, the economic cost minimization mode, and the comprehensive efficiency optimization mode. The environmental benefit maximization mode is: within the economic cost threshold range, select the technology with the largest Pareto optimal centralized monetization environmental benefit NC; The economic cost minimization mode: selects the technology with the lowest Pareto optimal concentration of new technologies, which has the lowest economic cost (TC). The optimal overall performance mode: Based on the range of values ​​for each point in the Pareto optimal set, we define the ideal point I = (NC max ,TC min ), Calculate the Euclidean distance between each point in the Pareto optimal set and the ideal point, and select the point with the smallest distance as the optimal recommended solution.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S5 further includes a multi-technology combination decision-making step: Step S51: In the Pareto optimal set, select a subset P' of technologies that meet the preset economic cost threshold and environmental benefit threshold; Step S52: Perform a combined traversal of the technologies within the technology subset P'; Step S53: Calculate the total economic cost and total environmental benefits of each combination scheme, and eliminate combinations whose total economic cost exceeds the threshold; Step S54: Among the remaining available combinations, output the optimal combination scheme according to the decision preference pattern.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, In the multi-technology combination decision-making step, the combination traversal includes: Selecting a single technology: Directly select a single technology from the technology subset P'; Select multiple technologies: Calculate all combinations of C(P′,k), where k is the number of technologies in the combination, k≥2, and sum the costs and benefits of the combinations.

8. A decision-making system for agricultural technology application based on Pareto frontier-based environmental-economic multi-objective optimization, wherein the system employs the method described in any one of claims 1-7, characterized in that... The system includes: The data management module is used to store agricultural technology data, crop adaptability information, and attribute index data; The indicator calculation module is used to calculate the monetization environmental benefits (NC) and new technology economic costs (TC) of each candidate technology based on the collected attribute indicators. The Pareto analysis module is used to make a dominance judgment based on the aforementioned monetization environmental benefits and the economic costs of new technologies, and to generate a Pareto optimal set. The decision optimization module is used to receive user-defined constraints and preference patterns, and to filter or combine target technical solutions from the Pareto optimal set. The human-computer interaction module is used to display benefit-cost scatter plots, Pareto frontier curves, and the final recommended solution.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, The electronic device includes a memory and a processor. The memory stores a computer program, and when the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method based on Pareto frontier as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the environmental-economic multi-objective optimization agricultural technology application decision-making method based on Pareto frontiers as described in any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images